Thought for the Day
Don’t argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.
As we all know, length is not everything
Over the last year or so a number of voices have been raised to argue that, in order to flourish or even survive, golf and golfers need a radical re-think about the way in which the game is played. More specifically, they debate the number of holes that are needed to constitute a round. The latest high profile figure to throw his hat into the ring is Sir Nick Faldo who, in addition to his role as an American TV commentator or analyst, has his own course design business. And I perhaps need to say here that, while I was never a great fan of Faldo the man, I am a huge admirer of his design philosophy and have been lucky enough to play several of his courses, all of which I think are excellent.
Speaking in Vietnam last week, he joined the chorus of other golf notables, such as Greg Norman and Jack Nicklaus, advocating that golf courses could or should be shorter – not reduced in length for 18 holes, but having fewer holes. The consensus among them seems to be that 12 holes would be sufficient. Hearing such a proposal might cause you to instantly think: ‘But that wouldn’t be golf’ so let’s just consider the idea for a few moments.
The game at grass roots level is in freefall – whenever economic hardship bites people tend to divide their expenditure into ‘essential’ and ‘desirable’ and for many, golf membership or green fees are emphatically in the second category. There’s also the time it takes. Assuming you play with at least one other person, by the time you factor in travel to and from the course, and a drink after the round, you’re looking at taking up a minimum of four hours from your day. In addition, reducing the number of holes would directly reduce greenkeeping and maintenance costs.
On a more personal note, I also think it could improve your game and scoring. I have certainly become aware that as I grow older, I have become increasingly likely to ruin a potentially good score by metaphorically falling to pieces over the last few holes as I grow weary and lose concentration. Sometimes it’s just one bad hole that buggers things up, and at others it might be two or three sloppy, lazy or tired swings over the same number of holes. Either way, I walk off feeling frustrated at what might have been rather than pleased with what was.
Reducing the number of holes would also, in many instances, allow your golf courses to be dramatically improved. Many have holes adjacent to each other that are just a bit too close together for comfort and freeing up additional space offers the opportunity to minimise such problems. It could also reduce risk – when holes are too close, the possibility of an errant shot hitting another golfer rises exponentially. Alternatively it could allow existing holes that don’t come up to scratch (and most courses have at least a couple that fit his description) to be modified and improved, turning a weak par four into a decent par five, for example. Or it might allow for a decent practice ground to be built, retaining a couple of properly constructed greens for short-game practice.
A few brave souls have bitten the bullet and created 12 hole courses – there’s one on the Isle of Arran called Shiskine Golf and Tennis Club, South Petersfield GC and the Kingfisher at St Mary’s Hotel G&CC in SE Wales, in addition to at least two in Ontario, Canada. All seem to be flourishing. It takes quite an adjustment to play over a par 48 layout, and we have become so accustomed to 18 holes that the very thought of a round of just two thirds the length is sacrilege but perhaps the time is rapidly approaching when we need a radical re-think.
And remember, the number 18 is purely arbitrary. There is no logical reason why courses are this length – the number came about purely by accident at St Andrews, which traditionally had 12 holes, which were laid out in a line and 10 holes were played twice, making a round of 22 holes. In 1764 the first four holes were combined into two, resulting in a round of 18 holes and because of the pre-eminence of St Andrews in the golfing world, where it led, others followed. Perhaps it’s time to revert to the days of our predecessors and imagine, once again, that the year is 1763. It could represent a step forward.
Quote of the Week
No man has mastered golf until he realises that his good shots are accidents and his bad shots are good exercise
Eugene R. Black